The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Claude Fable 5.1 vs DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Vision-Exp

Claude Fable 5.1 leads the LLM Stats Score 55.7 to 46.0. DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Vision-Exp is 60.6x cheaper per token.

Anthropic · DeepSeek · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Claude Fable 5.1 leads the overall LLM Stats Score 55.7 to 46.0, ranking #2 overall.

In the 1 individual benchmarks reported for both models, Claude Fable 5.1 wins 1; this is a narrower head-to-head signal than the composite indexes.

On price, DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Vision-Exp is roughly 60.6x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.

DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Vision-Exp also accepts a larger context window (1,048,576 input tokens), making it the stronger choice for long documents and large codebases.

Based on current LLM Stats indexes, shared benchmarks, pricing, and model metadata for 2026.

Choose Claude Fable 5.1

  • overall performance matters — it scores 55.7 and ranks #2 on LLM Stats
  • your work emphasizes reasoning and agents — it leads those capability indexes
  • you value its reported benchmark strengths — it wins 1 of 1 exact shared results
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Sep 2026

Choose DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Vision-Exp

  • cost matters — it's about 60.6x cheaper per token
  • you process long inputs — it offers a 1,048,576 token context window

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

Core performance indexes
55.7
#2
46.0
#27
52.8
#5
42.4
#44
35.5
#26
35.1
#30
41.3
#2
32.9
#25
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
1 of 1
0 of 1
Input price
$10.00 / M
$0.22 / M
Output price
$50.00 / M
$0.66 / M
Context window
1,000,000
1,048,576

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

1 shared
Index
Claude Fable 5.1
DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Vision-Exp
30.2#18
25.6#34
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

7 reported for Claude Fable 5.1 · 7 for DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Vision-Exp

1 shared

Claude Fable 5.1 outperforms in 1 benchmarks (AutomationBench), while DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Vision-Exp is better at 0 benchmarks.

Claude Fable 5.1 significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Sun Sep 20 2026 • llm-stats.com

Human preference

Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores

Pricing Analysis

Price comparison per million tokens

DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Vision-Exp costs less

For input processing, Claude Fable 5.1 ($10.00/1M tokens) is 45.5x more expensive than DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Vision-Exp ($0.22/1M tokens).

For output processing, Claude Fable 5.1 ($50.00/1M tokens) is 75.8x more expensive than DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Vision-Exp ($0.66/1M tokens).

In conclusion, Claude Fable 5.1 is more expensive than DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Vision-Exp.*

* Using a 3:1 ratio of input to output tokens

Lowest available price from all providers
Sun Sep 20 2026 • llm-stats.com
Anthropic
Claude Fable 5.1
Input tokens$10.00
Output tokens$50.00
Best providerAnthropic
DeepSeek
DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Vision-Exp
Input tokens$0.22
Output tokens$0.66
Best providerDeepSeek
Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Vision-Exp accepts 1,048,576 input tokens compared to Claude Fable 5.1's 1,000,000 tokens. DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Vision-Exp can generate longer responses up to 393,216 tokens, while Claude Fable 5.1 is limited to 128,000 tokens.

Anthropic
Claude Fable 5.1
Input1,000,000 tokens
Output128,000 tokens
DeepSeek
DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Vision-Exp
Input1,048,576 tokens
Output393,216 tokens
Sun Sep 20 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

Both Claude Fable 5.1 and DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Vision-Exp support multimodal inputs.

They are both capable of processing various types of data, offering versatility in application.

Claude Fable 5.1

Text
Images
Audio
Video

DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Vision-Exp

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Claude Fable 5.1 was released on 2026-09-01, while DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Vision-Exp was released on 2026-08-21.

Claude Fable 5.1 is 0 month newer than DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Vision-Exp.

Claude Fable 5.1

Sep 1, 2026

2 weeks ago

1w newer
DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Vision-Exp

Aug 21, 2026

1 months ago

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Neither model specifies a knowledge cutoff date.

Unable to compare the recency of their training data.

No cutoff dates available

Provider Availability

Claude Fable 5.1 is available from Anthropic. DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Vision-Exp is available from DeepSeek, DeepInfra.

Claude Fable 5.1

anthropic logo
Anthropic
Input Price:Input: $10.00/1MOutput Price:Output: $50.00/1M

DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Vision-Exp

deepseek logo
DeepSeek
Input Price:Input: $0.22/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.66/1M
deepinfra logo
Deepinfra
Input Price:Input: $0.44/1MOutput Price:Output: $1.32/1M
* Prices shown are per million tokens

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against Claude Fable 5.1 and DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Vision-Exp side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Claude Fable 5.1
✓ Preferred
DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Vision-Exp
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Claude Fable 5.1 vs DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Vision-Exp.

Which is better, Claude Fable 5.1 or DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Vision-Exp?

Claude Fable 5.1 leads the LLM Stats Score 55.7 to 46.0. Claude Fable 5.1 is made by Anthropic and DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Vision-Exp is made by DeepSeek. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their capability indexes, individual benchmarks, pricing, and limits above.

How does Claude Fable 5.1 compare to DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Vision-Exp in benchmarks?

Claude Fable 5.1 scores OSWorld 2.0: 77.9%, CursorBench v3.2: 73.4%, Humanity's Last Exam: 65.0%, GDPval-AA: 61.8%, Terminal-Bench 4.0: 55.8%. DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Vision-Exp scores Terminal-Bench 2.1: 83.9%, DSBench-Hard: 63.6%, DeepSWE: 59.3%, NL2Repo: 57.7%, ZEROBench: 35.0%.

Is Claude Fable 5.1 cheaper than DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Vision-Exp?

DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Vision-Exp is 45.5x cheaper for input tokens. Claude Fable 5.1 costs $10.00/M input and $50.00/M output via anthropic. DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Vision-Exp costs $0.22/M input and $0.66/M output via deepseek.

What are the context window sizes for Claude Fable 5.1 and DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Vision-Exp?

Claude Fable 5.1 supports 1.0M tokens and DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Vision-Exp supports 1.0M tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.

What are the main differences between Claude Fable 5.1 and DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Vision-Exp?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (55.7 vs 46.0), context window (1.0M vs 1.0M), input pricing ($10.00 vs $0.22/M), licensing (Proprietary vs Unknown). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Claude Fable 5.1 and DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Vision-Exp?

Claude Fable 5.1 is developed by Anthropic and DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Vision-Exp is developed by DeepSeek.